I´m not gonna answer why she isn´t a superhero because I seem to be the only who think that.

The part about Hawkeye and BW I need to say some about.

Those who think chars without any superpowers aren´t worth having in AoU/A3 don´t know what they are talking about, and yes ppl think like this. I´dont usually get mad but that is retarded.

My friend invited a guy he knew to skype. So he asked me what I was doing and I said superherohype forum and the disussion lead to some talk about AoU, and he says: "Yeah that Hawkeye dude can just die in the beginning, so that someone with some actual powers can get more screen time"

Hawkeye is one of my favourites I told the bastard. So he asks "Why? That´s just retarded he uses arrows when there are lasers, firearms and other much better stuff" I asked him if he ever read some about Hawkeye/TA. He says "Nope" But you have seen Thor? I ask "Yeah that viking dude" Me: Good then I take from you, your fantastic wisdom, and cast you out! He was kicked out of the conversation and that guy never sent a friendsrequest, that I can tell you.

So, that sounded like a very mature conversation.

__________________"It's true. All of it. The Dark Side. The Jedi. They're real."

rebuilding JARVIS. this isn't complicated at all. Tony had an A.I. in Iron Man 1. we have seen the A.I. take control of the armor when Tony was rendered unconscious. extrapolate from there.

Why is he "rebuilding" JARVIS? Sure, it glitched during IM3, and that's probably some sort of foreshadowing for Ultron; but JARVIS was still functioning just fine by movie's end, dutifully following Stark's orders for all the (literal) fireworks at the climax. Stark's got no discernable reason to "rebuild" JARVIS. Besides, how could he go from making an absolutely perfect AI in JARVIS, only to completely screw it up royally with JARVIS 2.0 as ULTRON?

What makes *more* sense is that Tony builds Extremis/Bleeding Edge armor between IM3 and AoU. The biomechanical suit then becomes an easy gateway for a rogue AI like ULTRON (yes, built by someone who *isn't* named Tony Stark) to trojan-horse and take over, thus making Iron Man his/its literal slave. (See: Bendis' Mighty Avengers, 2007.)

Why is he "rebuilding" JARVIS? Sure, it glitched during IM3, and that's probably some sort of foreshadowing for Ultron; but JARVIS was still functioning just fine by movie's end, dutifully following Stark's orders for all the (literal) fireworks at the climax. Stark's got no discernable reason to "rebuild" JARVIS. Besides, how could he go from making an absolutely perfect AI in JARVIS, only to completely screw it up royally with JARVIS 2.0 as ULTRON?

he retrieved J.A.R.V.I.S at the end of the movie, for a reason. that they'd bother showing it should tell you something. it's not like they were leaving an opening for a fourth Iron Man movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

What makes *more* sense is that Tony builds Extremis/Bleeding Edge armor between IM3 and AoU. The biomechanical suit then becomes an easy gateway for a rogue AI like ULTRON (yes, built by someone who *isn't* named Tony Stark) to trojan-horse and take over, thus making Iron Man his/its literal slave. (See: Bendis' Mighty Avengers, 2007.)

Wait wait wait, I don´t know exactly how it could take over Iron Man but the idea that someone else actually builds Ultron, and use it to take over Iron Man is quite amusing. Zola uses brainscans of himself to build Ultron, and then find a way to transfer him. I can see some things that he could benefit from doing that. But ofc, Dr Frankenstein can´t control his monster because this one is as nuts as Dr Frankenstein himself hehe))))))))

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkilban2

@Mighty could you please not use the R word if you dont mind.. I hate it so much, such an ugly word, makes me cringe.

Banner wasn't offered work. Stark told him to come visit because it was like "Candyland". See this is what I mean when you routinely reinvent what happened in the movie.

Quote:

2. They were together in the end of IM3 (after credit scene)
which could mean that they will be working together or have a "close" friendship in AoU.

It does? Or he's simply riding in the car with Stark because he was the Avenger he hung out with the most in the movie.

Quote:

3. Banner in the MCU has been portrayed as a somewhat brilliant scientist.

A scientist specializing in "Gamma Radiation".

Quote:

I never said that he was an A.I expert.

"He can with lets say Banner create the AI and tech for their own purposes and they unknowingly create Ultron in the process.
There are a lot of purposes for why he would even create Ultron."

Wouldn't you need to have expertise in the field of advanced robotics and artificial intelligence to help create something like Ultron?

Quote:

We saw that S.H.I.E.L.D. put both of them together to work on finding Loki
(I know that was his area of expertise in particular)

They brought Banner in to track the gamma signature from the cube which was too small for SHIELD to trace.

Quote:

For all these reasons I think it´s possible that they will work together again.
Who is to say that Banner can´t help Tony in some way with the AI and tech?
Banner is a scientist and definitely a friend of Stark, so I can imagine all kinds of different things he could help with.
He could for one be helping with navigation, comunication, tracking equipment for Ultron.
I can also, this I´m gonna regret saying, imagine a secnario where Tony work with Banner and they use Banner´s
brain patterns for Ultron.

Wouldn't you need to have expertise in the field of advanced robotics and artificial intelligence to help create something like Ultron?

There's this tendancy in the comics for scientists to practice SCIENCE! which means they're experts in their fields and also pretty damn smart in even unrelated ones. I think that's part of the thought process here.

__________________

"That was the edge Parker had; he knew that survival was more important than heroics. It isn't how you play the game, it's whether you win or lose.”
~ Richard Stark, Deadly Edge

He can be working with SHIELD or some other org, perhaps providing hardware for a project they need help with and he unknowingly provides high end tech for Ultron.

He can be working with an old or completely new AI that the council/Shield and he unknowingly creates Ultron because of tampering or accident.

He can with lets say Banner create the AI and tech for their own purposes and they unknowingly create Ultron in the process.
There are a lot of purposes for why he would even create Ultron.

My point is that unknowingly creating/unwitting creator can be pretty vague.

Well Jarvis like we've been saying for a LONG time IS AI and Tony HAS been building robots since he was a kid.
I'm sure the destruction of all his Armor will have something to do with the story in some way. All he picked up was a Screw driver when he left his destroyed house

What are you talking about? He retrieved his helper robot "Dummy". And Jarvis needs no "retrieving". The AI exists independent of Tony's suits.

You're right, but Tony also rescued U and a screwdriver from the wreck of his house. Dum-E and U had previously been seen tragically reaching for one another as they sank into the briny deep. I was relieved to see Tony driving off with them, else I would have fretted and mourned their passing.

He can be working with SHIELD or some other org, perhaps providing hardware for a project they need help with and he unknowingly provides high end tech for Ultron.

He can be working with an old or completely new AI that the council/Shield and he unknowingly creates Ultron because of tampering or accident.

He can with lets say Banner create the AI and tech for their own purposes and they unknowingly create Ultron in the process.
There are a lot of purposes for why he would even create Ultron.

My point is that unknowingly creating/unwitting creator can be pretty vague.

Except none of those scenarios would ever actually, you know, *happen* in the MCU. Stark working for SHIELD? Stark working for the Council? When hell freezes over. He despises Nick Fury, and he despises the WSC; even more so after The Avengers.

And he's out of the weapons business entirely. Tony Stark has no reason to develop a killer robot.

And there's this to consider: Ultron may already exist; and we may have already seen him in action.

Consider the bit that people keep bringing up about IM3: JARVIS is already getting screwy during that movie and glitching out inexplicably. i.e., Ultron is already infiltrating the system. If that's the case, then Ultron already exists *somewhere,* independently of Tony Stark's knowledge, craft, or control.

Cap has super powers regardless of how they describe his abilities. Same goes for BW and Hawkeye. Their abilities go waaaaay beyond what a typical action hero can do. None of them are within "normal human" range thats for sure.

__________________
Originally Posted by KangConquers

At the risk of being totally offensive...there's a quote from Ghandi about Christianity that can be reappropriated for this.

If having super powers is what qualifies you for being a superhero, than I guess Batman is **** out of luck.

Ya really. You can be a superhero without having "super powers".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whiskey Tango

There's this tendancy in the comics for scientists to practice SCIENCE! which means they're experts in their fields and also pretty damn smart in even unrelated ones. I think that's part of the thought process here.

Hahaha the all-encompassing word "SCIENCE" ..... that's what I find corny about some comic books. I do not want to see the MCU littered with the cliche "super smart scientist" thing. It just becomes diluted. If they're going to include some, have them very specifically related to a particular field.

In the comics Stark was part of SHIELD for longer than Nick Fury, he was actually one of the dudes that introduced Nick to the organization. As for the film, Tony builds A.I's, one of them goes Rogue and becomes Ultron. Not very difficult to imagine in my opinion.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by childeroland

Plenty of male-led action films fail, yet the actors' gender is not blamed. Why should it be different for women? Especially since far more male-led action films are made than female-led action films?

Been sitting there wondering how an advanced robotics system can actually pose a threat to someone like The Hulk or Thor. Based on the "worldwide" approach Feige mentioned in interviews, I understand the fight will aim to stretch the Avengers thin across multiple continents. However .... again how does Ultron actually battle someone like those aforementioned Avengers. I'm guessing he will make use of the advanced weaponry SHIELD has been hard at work constructing with the possibility that tech from the Chitauri invasion could play a role.